By Ann Edwards

U.S. adult numeracy education is a complex landscape. Numeracy, defined as “the ability to access, use, interpret and communicate mathematical information and ideas in order to engage in and manage the mathematical demands of a range of situations in adult life” (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020), emphasizes learners’ use and application of mathematical skills, understanding, and, increasingly, digital literacy. In trying to build these skills, adult learners must navigate a variety of course structures around the competing demands of their daily lives, while instructors balance diverse policies, content, and standards to try to meet learners’ needs. So how can adult numeracy instructors create courses that address this reality and help students succeed?

The Adult Numeracy in the Digital Era (ANDE) Project was funded by the U.S Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences to develop and test a technology-enabled approach to improving adult numeracy and digital literacy. As part of this project, we scanned the field to gain a better understanding of the adult numeracy education landscape and inform our course design. Using a data collection and synthesis approach pioneered by researchers at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Park & Takahashi, 2013) and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, we examined written resources, interviewed experts, and conducted site visits. Two themes emerged from our research:

Variability is a defining element of adult education

• Adult learners bring a variety of backgrounds and levels of readiness as well as valuable and unrecognized practical numeracy knowledge drawn from life experiences—such as running businesses and obtaining prior degrees.
• Numeracy instructors also have varied backgrounds in education and mathematics, and teach in complex situations where they must respond to multiple, competing standards, work in a range of classroom contexts, and address state and federal requirements that compete with learning activities.
• Course schedules and structures vary across several dimensions—course length, frequency of class meetings, delivery method, class duration, format—and these differences make planning and course development challenging for instructors and institutions.

Learner goals are diverse and there are obstacles to meeting them

• Adult learners are motivated to participate in adult education by personal, societal, and economic forces to attain high school credits or a diploma, college readiness, new job skills, or general career advancement.
• Although they are goal-oriented and committed to their courses and future endeavors, adult learners have limited time and competing responsibilities, including work and family commitments.
• Course content, standards, and sequences may not directly align with adult learners’ goals, in part because policies and federal reporting requirements may shift the focus to other priorities.

Given these factors, we have identified three principles for adult numeracy course design to make courses more responsive to learners, along with questions that instructors and course designers can consider.

Aligned and Relevant

Adult learners want course content that meets their needs and will help them attain their personal and professional goals. However, with learners’ diverse experiences and the paucity of rigorously-tested adult learning curriculum materials, instructors spend significant time deciding on content while balancing the demands of mandated standards and high-stakes assessments. Formative assessment data, such as collecting student responses systematically and identifying common student errors, would help instructors better address student needs and facilitate students’ development and conceptual understanding. Keep these ideas in mind by asking yourself the following questions:

• What are my students’ goals and how do I know?
• What connections can I make from the course content to my students’ goals?
• How does the course content support overlooked aspects of numeracy like mathematical practices or problem-solving skills?
• What information could I easily gather to use for formative assessment?

Interactive and Participatory

In variable policy contexts and learning conditions, flexible and engaging mathematics activities create rich mathematics learning opportunities for students. Students mentioned how important it was to be able to ask questions freely and receive just-in-time support from instructors. Different learning modalities—online or in-person classes, videos, worksheets—were also described as compelling and motivating. Identify approaches you could take by addressing the following questions:

• What activities encourage student mathematical talk?
• How do I use synchronous and asynchronous instruction strategically to realize learning goals?

Relationship-Centered

Students’ academic mindset, self-efficacy, and anxiety influence how they feel about and perform in a mathematics learning situation and the trust that they develop with others in that setting. Adult numeracy instructors are exceedingly mission-driven and seek to build trusting relationships with their students and support their students’ success, even if they may focus more on supporting ongoing attendance than on emphasizing numeracy skills. Build on these strengths by considering the following questions:

• What do I know about my students as mathematics learners?
• What strengths do my students bring to mathematics class and how can I capitalize on them?
• What activities can I include to foster a mathematics community?

Gain a more comprehensive picture of the adult numeracy education landscape and key factors impacting adult numeracy learning and technology use by reading the full research brief or revisiting our Adult Numeracy in the Digital Era (ANDE) project website for updates on the development of our adult numeracy course.

By Kathy Booth

Each year, the federal government and philanthropy release funding opportunities for educators to improve outcomes for learners. Often, these resources are channeled into multiyear initiatives. Educators rally around fresh logic models, master the terminology of new frameworks, review metrics for success, and roll out innovative implementation strategies. But frequently these efforts lose traction. Rather than dig into resistance to a reform effort that has been underway for a few years, attention shifts to a new approach that has come into vogue. Therefore, it is not surprising that many practitioners feel jaded about the boom-and-bust cycle of education reform. While the specific call to action may change from case to case, the factors that cause improvement efforts to flounder are often the same. Based on our experience working within institutions on implementing systems change, the Center for Economic Mobility staff refer to these roadblocks as the Seven Deadly Sins of Education Reform.

1. Death by Pilot

Given the limited discretionary funding at most education institutions, pilot projects are appealing mechanisms to improve student outcomes. However, they can also be very effective at diverting the energies of talented educators into work that affects only a small percentage of the overall learner population. Even though research may show that the piloted approach works, these reformers often hear that the costs are too great to be applied to all learners. Meanwhile, institutions continue to pour significant resources into things that don’t work and often kick off new pilot projects, which contributes to initiative fatigue.

2. Hiding Behind Regulations

When someone says “this isn’t allowed!” and cites a legal framework like the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), we often let the conversation stop rather than investigating what the rules really are and whether they prohibit the intended action. Or education institutions may be reluctant to devote resources to new strategies because they believe that funding streams prohibit nontraditional activities. Furthermore, when regulations truly run counter to our intended actions, we often treat them as immutable rather than working to fix the rules that are getting in learners’ ways.

3. Blaming Teachers and Counselors

When initiatives aren’t implemented with fidelity, we often point the finger at people who work with learners most closely. However, these frontline educators (especially adjunct professors) may not have been engaged in designing the interventions or given clear information about the intended changes to practice. Rather than viewing communication and professional development as critical components of achieving our institutional reform goals, engagement and training resources are generally minimal and uncoordinated.

4. Blaming Partners and Learners

Education has a hierarchy. Four-year institutions may view community colleges as less rigorous, while community colleges may blame high schools and adult education providers for sending them underprepared learners. However, policies and mindsets within our own institutions can have a significant negative impact on enrollment and persistence. Furthermore, when our education partners or employers make it difficult for learners to continue their training and career journeys, we don’t always speak up and identify ways to better serve our learners together.

5. Allowing a Vocal Minority to Prevail

When we allow a forceful voice in a meeting to drown out other perspectives, internal concerns can overrule learner needs and derail reform efforts. For example, a few faculty in a math department may become the arbiters of the types of quantitative skills that are available to all learners, or resources for early career exploration can be diverted from liberal arts programs because some educators feel that discussing money cheapens their discipline. Avoiding conflict can also mean that groups won’t override a single naysayer even when most parties agree on a solution.

6. Arguing Over Data Definitions

It is important to understand the methodology behind metrics, but focusing on edge cases can prevent meaningful engagement with the overall numbers. Too often, we get distracted by arguing about data definitions and insisting on complete and perfect data sets. This allows us to sidestep research findings and avoid conversations about the implications of available data. For example, in a situation where only 5 percent of learners are succeeding, debating whether the denominator should be expanded to make the figure 8 percent may be less important than identifying what stands in the way for the vast majority of learners.

7. Ignoring Learners to Preserve Our Own Comfort

Many of the changes necessary to improve learner outcomes will require giving things up and shifting what each of us does within an institution. This type of change can be painful and uncomfortable, but it can also be freeing and bring us into alignment with why we chose to work in education. Many of these issues are grounded in race and deep divides in opportunity, reflecting unconscious bias that reinforces inequity. We must address these issues head on to create lasting improvements to education attainment for historically minoritized populations.

For every Deadly Sin our team has seen, we have also witnessed many courageous solutions. Access this PowerPoint deck for examples of how educators have demonstrated “Sprightly Virtues” that are antidotes to the Seven Deadly Sins and get inspired about ways that you can make a difference too.

By Kathy Booth

In the wake of news stories and polls questioning whether college is worth the cost, entities like the U.S. Department of Education College Scorecard and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching are seeking to quantify which institutions and majors provide a reasonable return on investment. While the methodology is becoming more sophisticated, the drive to identify “good majors” is not new. We are all familiar with the trope of young people arguing with their parents about wanting to pursue a passion for philosophy or music rather than a sensible degree like business. But is business really the best major to choose?

One way to answer this question is to examine the empirical relationship between school and work. Every year, the U.S. Census conducts the American Community Survey, which captures information on the subjects in which people earned bachelor’s degrees, the types of jobs they get, and salaries over time. WestEd’s Center for Economic Mobility made this information more accessible by creating the California Occupations by Bachelor’s Degree dashboard, which allows you to see the most common jobs for specific majors as well as the majors that are most common for specific jobs.

If you select psychology majors—one of the most prevalent bachelor’s degree disciplines—you will see many jobs that you would expect, such as social worker and therapist. But you will also see that graduates are just as likely to be managers as they are counselors. This outcome makes sense if you know the content of the curriculum. Because psychology majors study human behavior and motivations, they learn skills that are prized in supervisors. However, if a student expresses an interest in a leadership role in a company, they are much more likely to be directed toward a business degree.

In fact, business degrees may not be the best option for students who are more interested in building their people skills than in mastering the general ledger. Many business degrees are heavily focused on numbers. For example, students often take courses in general accounting principles, microeconomics, and the IT systems that support budgeting or tracking accounts receivable. A student who is focused on the relationship management aspects of running a business might question the value of the courses in their major and instead find themselves drawn to psychology, communications, or English classes—all of which teach skills of direct relevance for their desired job.

Similarly, science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) majors are often touted as being a direct route to gainful employment. However, the market for STEM skills varies considerably by region. According to the California Occupations by Bachelor’s Degree dashboard, outcomes for science and math majors in the Inland Empire, a predominantly rural region in California, indicate that 3 of the top 10 occupations are K–12 teaching positions, and another common job outcome is chronic unemployment. Other common jobs for science and math majors are similar to those for social sciences majors in the region, including administrative assistant and first-line supervisor for retail.

Another challenge with assessing the value of specific majors is that some jobs, such as welding and truck driving, provide strong wages immediately, but earnings are unlikely to increase over time. Other disciplines, particularly in the humanities and social sciences, may take 10 years to yield similar salaries but continue to show wage growth over several decades.

Given the rapidly evolving work environment and employer interest in skills-based hiring, it may be less important which majors students pick. Instead, it will be increasingly important for colleges to provide opportunities for students to apply content learned in any discipline to job settings and to ensure students can explain the relevance of the knowledge they have to the positions they desire to hold.

Check out WestEd’s dashboard that shows the relationship between majors and jobs, or watch this video that describes ways to engage students in selecting a major that addresses both their interests and their economic imperatives.

By Kathy Booth

The world of work is changing in ways that make it challenging for learners to identify career options and the most appropriate training programs to prepare them for those opportunities. For example, advances in technology and increasing specialization mean that employers are looking for both interdisciplinary skill sets and highly specific knowledge. In addition, there may be many potential pathways to emerging fields, especially for adults who have already attained relevant competencies in other contexts. Educators can help learners navigate these transitions by providing specialized knowledge of regional labor market needs, related education programs, opportunities for work-based learning that leads to job placement, and supports that help to cover the full cost of participating in training. While this type of advising has traditionally only been available in career and technical education programs, it can benefit learners across all types of education and training programs.

A range of institutions—including high schools, adult education providers, community colleges, universities, and workforce systems—are creating career navigator positions to help learners understand how to build skills that are valued in the labor market, advance within a sector, and attain a living wage. In many ways, this role is the evolution of the traditional student adviser, encompassing knowledge of course progression toward awards while also providing concrete connections to employment and further economic opportunities.

While the role of career navigators is similar across these various institutions, there is flexibility in the design of their engagement to ensure that services are learner centered and provide effective guidance for local contexts. For example, at high schools, career navigators may focus on exposing students to a variety of career pathways, whereas a community college might emphasize programs for rapid upskilling that lead to high-quality careers and are also latticed to broader degrees.

The role of career navigators may also reflect where institutions are located. In rural communities, where institutions often have a service area of hundreds of miles, career navigators may be dedicated to serving specific geographic areas within that territory. In Tribal contexts, there is a need for career navigators who can work respectfully within Indigenous communities; understand the nuances of Indian Education and postsecondary financing; and carry specific knowledge related to employment in Tribal government, Tribal enterprises, and TERO offices (Tribal Employment Rights Ordinance or Office).

Finally, career navigators may provide guidance for all program areas or focus more narrowly on a specific sector. For example, in the case of advising on information and digital technology, a career navigator might provide information on the following:

• local industries, relevant subsectors in the local economy, or public sector needs (such as whether employers are focused on software testing or the management of cybersecurity threats at large server farms, or are in need of networking administrators in local government organizations)
• current job openings, projections for job openings, and typical wages (such as what types of jobs are currently available in the field of artificial intelligence)
• in-demand skills and industry credentials (such as Python, CompTIA Security+, or Cisco certifications)
• trajectories for career development (such as opportunities to move from help desk jobs to network administration)
• available educational programs with integrated industry credentials (such as IT classes or programs aligned with CompTIA and Microsoft credentials at noncredit technical centers, community colleges, and four-year institutions)
• institution-specific knowledge to support enrollment and retention (such as when courses are scheduled, matriculation processes, access to financial aid, and work-based learning opportunities)
• related services that can enable low-income learners to remain enrolled (such as how to leverage programs funded by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act to receive housing, childcare, and transportation support)

In addition to supporting learners in navigating training pathways to family-sustaining jobs, education institutions can benefit from investing in career navigators. Learners are more likely to enroll in programs that have a clear return on investment, which can address declining participation in postsecondary education and the growing narrative that college is not worth the cost. If educators provide this information to all learners—especially those in popular majors with less obvious career opportunities, like the humanities and social sciences disciplines—they can address both their own and their students’ bottom lines.

For examples of ways to provide information on the relationship between education and jobs in common sectors and majors, see sample Opportunity Maps developed by WestEd or read this case study of how career navigators benefited adult learners at an adult school.

By Dr. Blaire Toso, PhD

Adult basic education programs—which teach foundational language and literacy skills to adults—help some of the most marginalized learners attain language, literacy, numeracy, digital literacy, and workforce training and preparation skills. Students enroll in adult basic education programs for a variety of reasons, such as to earn a high school equivalency certificate or to learn English. They may also enroll to access training that leads to employment. Regardless of their starting points, adult learners are more likely to attain a living wage if they continue their academic and training journey by transitioning to career and technical education courses and for-credit college courses.

The relationship between postsecondary education, income, and income stability is well established. Each successive credential or degree increases employment and earning potential, particularly for adult learners. However, data on adult learner transitions are sparse. For example, the federal reporting system for adult learners does not systematically collect information on transitions to additional postsecondary education or training that result in academic or industry-recognized credentials. Creating data collection systems that capture transitions data—as well as platforms that provide nuanced analyses using easy-to-understand visualizations—can lead to targeted program planning and funding for adult learners who are seeking a pathway to economic mobility.

California provides one example of the power of tracking adult education transition data. Recently, WestEd’s Center for Economic Mobility explored transition rates for adult learners using data that has been made publicly available in the LaunchBoard Adult Education Pipeline. Among nearly 400,000 students enrolled in adult education in 2019, we found that

• Only one in five students transitioned from adult basic education courses to postsecondary education.
• Adult learners from adult basic education and adult secondary education programs (who tend to be younger) are about twice as likely to transition to postsecondary education as older students in English as a second language programs.
• Adult learner transition rates are higher from adult basic education programs that are offered at community colleges, compared to programs based at K–12 schools, perhaps because being co-located means they have fewer cultural, geographical, and institutional barriers to overcome.
• Transition rates vary by racial and ethnic groups, with the strongest outcomes for Black/African American learners (one in three), followed by White (one in four), and Asian and Hispanic students (one in five).

When states collect and link data on adult learners to better understand their longer-term outcomes, as well as how outcomes vary by specific student populations, they can be more effective at designing interventions that offer greater economic stability and mobility. In addition to California, states like Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, and Texas collect data on adult education and noncredit programs and could help point the way for similar efforts.

Visit the Transitions From Adult Education to Postsecondary Programs project page. Get inspired by reading a report that summarizes the analysis of California adult education transition rates and practice briefs that identify promising practices. Or, visit the LaunchBoard Adult Education Pipeline to explore how transition data can be linked and visualized.

By Thomas Torre Gibney

When it comes to designing equitable college and career readiness policies, context matters. From decades of research on inequalities in schooling, we know that students’ educational trajectories are not solely a function of individual choices. They are shaped by the classroom, school, and neighborhood conditions in which students learn. Yet, today’s students learn within highly stratified educational systems, in which racial and economic segregation is on the rise and access to rigorous curricula, high-quality postsecondary pathways, and prosperous careers remains out of reach for many. This stratification of opportunity begins early and compounds as students progress through their educational journeys. The practice of tracking students into different classes and course sequences based on their perceived abilities, for instance, can influence their subsequent access to advanced coursework, their college-going behaviors, and the types of jobs available to them.

Our educational data systems should reflect these realities. When we disaggregate education and employment data and augment traditional accountability metrics like enrollment and completion with other information about learner contexts, we can start to unpack the root causes of inequities and identify interventions that mitigate the effects of educational stratification. For example, federal data sources like the U.S. Department of Education’s Civil Rights Data Collection show that high schools with large proportions of students of color and low-income students are less likely to offer advanced mathematics and science courses, such as calculus and physics, compared to schools that enroll low proportions of these students. It’s not that students in high-minority or high-poverty schools choose not to take such courses; rather, the choice has been foreclosed to them altogether.

Knowing this context helps illuminate the patterns found in student-level datasets, such as the nationally representative surveys managed by the National Center for Education Statistics. Many of these surveys, like the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009, track students across education segments and into the workforce, and are linked to detailed student transcript, demographic, and geographic data. This is one way we know, for instance, that taking advanced coursework in high school can translate into better postsecondary and career outcomes. To cite another example, much of the recent evidence emerging around the role of career and technical education programs in preparing students for both college and careers has been made possible thanks to federal investments in statewide longitudinal data systems that connect data from historically siloed state agencies.

States will be more successful at closing equity gaps and ensuring their workforce is prepared for jobs that fuel prosperity if they have a better understanding of the structural factors that shape what people study and how far they go in their education. This is why many statewide longitudinal data systems are now integrating additional data sources, such as information on justice involvement or access to public benefit programs like food assistance. But other types of data are also needed.

For example, states can measure system conditions that inform education choices and outcomes, including school safety, access to early college coursework, and the availability of courses aligned with in-demand career pathways. They can also augment milestone data by tracking whether students are participating in work-based learning, completing applications for federal financial aid, and their mental and emotional well-being.

Capturing and linking additional information may seem daunting, but some states are already documenting non-education factors that impact learning at scale. For example, California administers the Healthy Kids Survey in grades 5, 7, 9, and 11. The survey captures student perspectives on school climate and safety, student wellness, and youth resiliency. Results are made available on public dashboards, and technical assistance is available to support schools to reflect on findings to inform local interventions.

The Healthy Kids Survey is one example of how states can develop a more holistic picture of the contexts surrounding students’ educational trajectories, in service of designing equitable policies that expand, rather than foreclose, the opportunities available to them. If diverse interest holders such as policy makers, educators, employers, and workforce development organizations have a joint understanding of the contextual factors shaping students’ college and career readiness, they can work together to create pathways and supports that lead to living wage jobs.

Find out more by reading WestEd’s study that used longitudinal data to understand college and career readiness interventions, watching a presentation that places study results into the broader policy context, and exploring the California Health Kids Survey.